In the MSM model, planning and evaluation are interconnected, the latter be- ing considered as a means for learning (Niza, 1998, Folque, 2012).
Thus Niza (2006) emphasizes that “ avaliar é produzir juízos de adequação e de valor. (…) Avaliar é expor e comunicar, pôr em comum a participação de cada um numa comunidade de aprendizagem. Avaliar é ajuizar sobre os percursos, os métodos e as produções para se poder prosseguir e progredir nesses projetos em comum”. [to evaluate is to produce judgments of appropriateness and value. (...) To evaluate is to expose and communicate, to pool one‘s participation in a le- arning community. To evaluate is to make judgments about the paths, methods and productions in order to be able to continue and progress in these common projects“ (p. 3)].
Formative evaluation, considered by MSM as an essential part of the educa- tional development process, is based on a set of tools known as „piloting tools”, which help the educator and the children to guide and regulate what happens in the classroom (Folque, 2012; Grave-Resendes & Soares, 2002; Niza, 1991, 2006). The piloting instruments are as follows:
Attendance Chart
It is a table with two entries that serves for the child to mark with a conventio- nal sign its presence, in the square where its name crosses with the column of the respective day of the month and week. Every morning as children come in they mark their own presence. Presence rhythms alternating with absences help build awareness of time from experiences.
Free texts
The moment of the writing of the free texts occurs during the hosting, when the children consider that the occurrences that they are narrating are so signi- ficant that they deserve to be written. It is in this context of exposition of their novelties, in which children choose to tell their friends only or to register them through the written code, that the educator must support verbal expression and to provoke dialogue and exchange of knowledge and experiences. Thus, these texts are reports that the educator mediates because it helps the discourse to be wor- ked, seeking the collaboration of the peers, the organization of ideas in space and time, and the enrichment of what one wants to verbalize and the development of vocabulary.
Activities Chart
It refers to a table with two entries that allows the child’s name to be crossed with the possible activities, usually represented by writing or by a pictorial symbol. The children’s names are in the vertical column on the left and the activity areas in the upper horizontal column. Before they start working, children plan and record what they chose on the chart, thus learning how to anticipate activities, plan and self-regulate their work, also allowing the educator to verify the children’s choices regarding the group, and to make an individual evaluation with the child (what she did more, what she did not choose, why, ...).
Inventories
They allow children to have a real knowledge of the objects and equipment available, as well as their potential uses. Only through awareness of what we have we can project what we are going to do. That is why in the main areas of the clas- sroom are written lists of materials and activities that are illustrated by the chil- dren and help them to remember and see the possibilities of working in this area.
Classroom Diary
This instrument (paper sheet with a minimum dimension og 90x60) consists of four columns: “we do not like”, “we like”, “we did” and “we want to do”. The first two columns collect the significant occurrences arising from social behaviour; the third presupposes the registration of productions considered as the most si- gnificant, and the fourth column introduces the survey of needs or ideas for new activities and work projects.
For Niza (1991) it is in the first two that the sociomoral balance of the weekly life of the group is based. They have the role of “raising awareness of situations of diversified social interaction between children and these with the adult” (Vieira, 2004, p. 5). On the one hand, they contribute to the elucidation and the awareness of the affections that certain kind of occurrences provoke in oneself and in others. On the other hand, it makes visible the right to the word, without fear of censor- ship, for deepening and shared construction of the everyone’s rights and duties. This reflection, which is collective, particularly discloses that rules make sense when re- sponding to the real problems of daily life, and reveals that it is important to discuss and confront ideas. Sometimes negative occurrences can give rise to new rules that are “fixed on the wall as group laws, which should be followed democratically and are only revocable in council” (Niza, 1998, p. 153). In fact, the written record of group rules (or called “what we agreed”) for a better management of behaviour and con- flict does not arise from the imposition of adults but from a progressive negotiation between them and children, as the events have been requiring it.
Metaphorically called “Moral Thermometer of the Class” (Niza, 1991), this in- strument is undoubtedly a piloting instrument in the “social construction of mo- rality” (Oliveira-Formosinho, 1996). For this development to take place, the adult has the important role of providing a safe environment and helping the child to decentralize and be more receptive to different perspectives.
Social Rules Chart
It includes the registration of the rules that were agreed for the regulation of the group. They are always discussed together and arise from a real need based on a problem that is sought to solve. Therefore, the listing should be progressively updated to the needs that the group is showing over time.
Responsibilities Chart
It allows the visualization of the allocation of the responsibilities of the room, which must be rotating by the children and divided by all. This framework usually consists of multiple foldersheaded by the name of the maintenance and routine support tasks.
In the folders tags are inserted with the names of the children responsible for their tasks. It is an open, dynamic table under construction that allows you to add or delete tasks according to the needs of the group and the room. When per- forming a certain task, the child feels responsible and useful, contributing to the cooperative and social life of the group.
In this horizon, teaching moments are carried out to regulate and improve, not as the a priori direction of learning. We have chosen to present a small illustration of this organization, thus transcribing for this purpose one of the occurrences portrayed by Novo (2009) in an early childhood classroom of a group of three- -year-old children. Peers are highlighted as informants of the training regulation that results from the exhibition of the works and in which the interpellation of the adult only serves to clarify the suggestions and to stimulate the cooperation and mutual help:
The educator reads: “Yesterday I cut my snail with a pair of scissors and then I painted it. Who’s making a snail in this room?” – “It’s Andreia,” a child responds. “It’s Andreia, indeed.” Meanwhile, the teacher places the snail in front of the child. “And the little horns?”, asks a child. “Look, An- dré is saying that the little horns are missing. Are you done yet?” The edu- cator asks. – “And the eyes? I haven’t seen the eyes”, says another child. “The eyes are missing, too”, adds the educator. “The eyes, the mouth and the nose”, André, repeats. “Andreia, they are helping you, aren’t they?”, asks the educator. (…) Listen up. Andreia, when your friends looked at your
snail said: Carlos said that the little eyes were missing. André said that the eyes, mouth, and nose were missing. You got some help for your work to- day. You’re going to finish the snail today, aren’t you? “And the ears”, says António. “And the ears. Look, so many details. Do you think you’re going to need help, Andreia? Do you think you’re going to need help to finish your work? Look, António, she says she needs help, okay?” – “I need to do my ant”, António replies. “Your ant? Look, it may be that while you’re on wor- king the ant you can help her by reminding her what she can’t forget about. What do you think? Is that ok?” António nods. “Is that fine, Andreia? He’ll remind you of what you cannot forget in your snail, okay? “Andreia also nods. (translation from Novo, 2009, p. 226).
It should be emphasized then that it is in the social aspect that the child mani- fests itself individually and in this sense the appreciation of children’s work is also achieved because they share the result of their effort with their peers. Dedication is included in the dialogue, in the form of evaluation, to launch new activities and projects (Niza, 1998). It is this critical reflection that drives the group, creating conditions for the democratic game that is experienced within the group.
In short, all those instruments are part of the group organization and arise from the information progressively recorded and analysed together. However, it should be remembered that the institutionalization of these tools along the daily routine does neither guarantee a true sociocentric approach nor the formative evaluation (Folque, 2012).
Conclusions
We believe that the study of this model may give us tools for a deeper reflec- tion on the social organization of learning that proposes to break with the si- multaneous teaching and with the early implementation of curriculum through subjects happening in early childhood education and care (ECEC). In addition to integrating a curriculum developed from a comprehensive and well-articula- ted perspective on how the child learns and the appropriate ways of providing meaningful learning experiences, we also believe that this model establishes that adult education should be consistent with the way in which educational contexts should be organized for children. In fact, there is an analogy between the forms of in-service training proposed by the MSM and the organization of the activities that are proposed by the educators to the children who participate in this model (Niza, 2009). Aware of these premises, and sharing the disbelief of “educational trends” and “didactic tricks” or simulations which, according to Niza, are the best
way to avoid shared reflection and debate. When this is linked to joint work on the profession; and being aware that the general description of this model does not aim at its “pre-defined reproduction”, it is, however, an important scaffold to support the educator in the search for a daily life with educational intentionality.
References
Folque, M. A. (1998). The influence of Vygotsky in Movimento da Escola Moderna: Early Education Curriculum. Jornal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 19, 131–139. Folque, M. A. (1999). A Influência de Vygotsky no Modelo Curricular do Movimento da
Escola Moderna Portuguesa, Escola Moderna,5, 5–12.
Folque, M. A. (2012). O aprender a aprender no pré-escolar: o modelo pedagógico do movi- mento da escola moderna. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
Folque. M. A. (2014). Reconstruindo a cultura em cooperação mediado pela pedagogia para a infância do Movimento da Escola Moderna portuguesa. Perspetiva, Floria- nópolis, 32, 951–975.
González, P. (2002). O Movimento da Escola Moderna – Um Percurso Cooperativo na Construção da Profissão Docente e na Desenvolvimento da Pedagogia Escolar. Porto: Porto Editora.
Grave-Resendes, L. (1989). Niza’s Pedagogical Model: a real life experience based approach to literacy.Doctoral thesis. Boston University.
Grave-Resendes, L., & Soares, J. (2002). Diferenciação Pedagógica. Lisboa: Universidade Aberta.
Niza, S. (1991). O Diário de Turma e o Conselho: Escola Moderna. Movimento da Escola Moderna,1 (3ª série), 27–30.
Niza, S. (1992a). Em Comum Assumimos uma Educação Democrática. In G. Vilhena et al. (Org.), Nos 25 anos do Movimento da Escola Moderna (pp. 39–47). Lisboa: Mo- vimento da Escola Moderna.
Niza, S. (1992b). Pilares de uma Prática Educativa. In G. Vilhena; J. Soares, & M. Henrique (Org.), Nos 25 anos do Movimento da Escola Moderna (pp. 7–9). Lisboa: MEM.
Niza, S. (1995). Formação cooperada. Lisboa: Educa.
Niza, S. (2006). Uma avaliação dinâmica em interação cooperada: Editorial. Escola Mo- derna, 27 (5), 3–4.
Niza, (2009). Contextos Associativos e Aprendizagem Profissional. A Formação no Mo- vimento da Escola Moderna. In J. Formosinho (Coord), Formação de Professores — Aprendizagem profissional e ação docente (pp. 345–362). Porto: Porto Editora. Niza, Y. & Santana, I. (1996). A organização do trabalho em conselho de cooperação edu-
cativa. Escola Moderna, 1–4ª Série, 41–44.
Nóvoa, A.; Marcelino, F., & Ramos do Ó, J.R. (Orgs.). (2012). Sérgio Niza: escritos sobre educação. Lisboa: Tinta-da-China.
Novo, R. (2009). A aprendizagem profissional da interacção adulto-criança: um estudo de caso multicontexto. Tese de Doutoramento. Portugal, Braga: Instituto de Educação, Universidade do Minho.
Novo, R. (2016).Perspective of the Modern School Movement.In G. Massari et al. (Eds). A Handbook on Experiencial Education: Pedagogical Guidelines for Teachers and Parents (p. 70–73). Erasmus-Project. Editura Universității Alexandru Ioan. Oliveira-Formosinho, J. (Org.) (1996). Educação Pré-Escolar: A construção social da mo-
ralidade. Porto: Porto Editora.
Oliveira-Formosinho, J. (2003). O Modelo Curricular do MEM – Uma Gramática Pedagó- gica Para a Participação Guiada. Escola Moderna, 18 (5), 5–9.
Santana, I. (1998). Estruturas da autoformação cooperada no Movimento da Escola Mo- derna Portuguesa. Escola Moderna, 3, 5–12.
Serralha, F. (2009). Caracterização do Movimento da Escola Moderna. Escola Moderna, 35, 5–50.
Vieira, F. (2004). O Diário de Turma como instrumento curricular para a construção so- cial da moralidade: os juízos sociais de crianças e adultos sobre incidentes negati- vos da vida em grupo. Escola Moderna, 20, 5–28.
Janez Vogrinc1 [email protected]
Vesna Podgornik2 [email protected]
1 Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia 2 Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Abstract
Self-evaluation research, carried out by pre-school teachers, can significantly contribute to improving the quality of work of the pre-primary education insti- tutions. In addition to possessing solid knowledge of pre-school education and of the child development, pre-school teachers should possess basic knowledge of conducting pedagogical research in order to carry out quality self-evalua- tion research. In the paper, the current situation in the field of self-evaluation research in Slovenian kindergartens (self-evaluation frequency) and the condi- tions provided to pre-school teachers for self-evaluation (knowledge of educa- tors, their attitude towards self-evaluation, etc.) are highlighted. Our research was conducted on a representative sample of pre-school teachers, employed in Slovenian kindergartens. The questionnaire was completed by 398 pre-school teachers, employed in 89 kindergartens all over Slovenia. Almost four-fifths of the pre-school teachers reported to carry out self-evaluation frequently or very frequently; they most frequently checked how children followed the rules, their